What OS would you use ?

[jockdisvdude]

I'm making a new computer, AMD 1.2 Thunderbird with 256 DDR ram. I was wondering what OS you would use if you are using the computer at home. I plan to play some games, use photoshop, internet etc. But alot of graphics and design. Here are the OS to choose from, Price is not an issue:

Windows 98 SE
Windows 2000 Professional
Windows 2000 Advanced Server
Windows XP Beta 2
Windows ME (Millenium Edition)

 

[splice]

Win2K Pro

 

[Scouzer]

Well...mostly Photoshop your going to want more RAM, and if you want more than 256m of RAM you want Win 2k Pro...

 

[MrMilney]

Win2K Pro. Security, stability, compatibility...what more could you ask for?

 

[crt1530]

The only benefits I've found with Advanced Server are the ability to run an FTP server and using remote services.

 

[bevancoleman]

Windows XP, Have used it for several months now and it's great

 

[jockdisvdude]

Hmm, Win2K sounds like a valid approach. What about Win ME and Win XP ? I heard theres a new RC1 or whatever, what do you guys think about that ?

 

[crt1530]

ME == NOT TOUCHING WinXP unless I get my hands on a corporate copy.

 

[jockdisvdude]

Whats the difference between a corporate copy ?

 

[bex0rs]

Whats the difference between a corporate copy ?

*cough* free *cough*


jockdisvdude, I'd go with Win2k Pro for now. It will give you the best performance for your foreground applications, plus Microsoft is up to SP2 now, so most of the glaring bugs have been worked out.

~bex0rs

 

[jockdisvdude]

very good point about the bugs. I think I'm going to go with WIndows 2000 Professional, see where it leads me from there and install dual OS's if needed. Thanks everyone

 

[ledzepp98]

Windows 98 SE

can be ok if you get lucky... but not highly recommended


Windows 2000 Professional

yes...this is the right choice!


Windows 2000 Advanced Server

no need for this version unless you actually plan to use the server functions (beyond the basic ftp/server functions of win2k pro)


Windows XP Beta 2

i don't have personal experience with this one...but i haven't gotten a good vibe from all the talk about the hassles involved with registering the copy and how it is hardware specific. i'm going to avoid this one until the final version has been reviewed a lot. also, final versions tend to have plenty of bugs...so i wouldn't build a computer solely around a pre-release operating system


Windows ME (Millenium Edition)

i wouldn't use this again even if i was paid to


well, that's just my $.02

 

[DaejangNim]

i'd go with 98SE or ME if u plan on a lot of gaming, cus if u look @ 3dmark scores in 2000 and 2001 in comparisons from people who have win2k and people who have win9x, 9x wins.

edit: but then again ppl with win9x have to reboot a lot because of random errors!

 

[nnnyyy]

Win2K pro. Very stable and pretty good for gaming too.

 

[Rickten]

I hate winME except for one thing. It has the ability to handle zip files without a third party program. I wondering for those who have used WinXP if this is a part of the OS. Is there a way that I can add this feature to win2000. I loved not having to use winzip.

 

[bevancoleman]

Rickten

There is a basic zip app included in WinXP, also a CD-burner (though I couldn't get it working under WinXP B2).

 

[AthlonMan]

It call depends on your news first of all i would just scratch off Windows XP Beta 2, still Beta which means driver support for one is not going to be good.
Windows ME still needs a lot of work, if you were going to choose this style of OS then use Windows 98 SE. Standard rule of thumb with MS products is to wait until a Service Release or Service Pack or Second Edition is out before using the product. Windows 2000 Advanced Server or Windows 2000 Server are completely useless for your needs. Windows 2000 is a good rock hard stable OS, and Windows 98 SE is not as stable but can be quite stable if installed properly

Your two choices are either Windows 2000 Pro or Windows 98 SE. Thinks to consider :

98 plays pretty much every game including DOS games.
2000 on the other hand plays pretty much everything that is new, but older Windows 95 games and DOS games are not supported.
2000 is a lot more stable then 98, and does not need to reboot for everything you do with it.
2000 is a lot more secure then 98. IE file permissions, NTFS, and the fact you have to login to use the machine.
2000 i would say is better for the graphics and design stuff, like autocad and photoshop etc.
2000 is a true multi tasking enviroment which 98 you can multi task but it is not a true multi tasking OS.

You have three options

1. duel boot and make a 10 gig 98 partition if you want to play tons of games but need 2000.
2. run 2000 and live with the fact that games are not 100% supported.
3. run 98 and play all games but have a non true multi tasking, and less stable OS.

 

[bevancoleman]

<<2000 is a true multi tasking enviroment which 98 you can multi task but it is not a true multi tasking OS>>

Windows 98 is in fact a true multitasking OS, all Windows version 3.1+ (and possably before) can multitask.

However Windows 95 introduced preemtive multitaking, which is more stable.

Windows 2k however blows all previous OS out of the water.

I personally use Windows XP, because I get it for free and because it has great device support (no need for VIA 4-in-1s).

 

[AthlonMan]

actually not it is not a true multi tasking envirorment, there pal you can not tell programs to take certain % of your cpu like you can in NT 4.0 and 2k and XP.

 

[Athlon4all]

2000 Pro on anything that has a 450MHz CPU, and at least 128MB RAM, preferable 256MB.

 

[UpGrD]

Dual boot! W98se (for games and compatability) Win2K (for pro apps)
I just setup a dual boot system last night and it could not be easyser. Install W98 first then install W2k. They install over each other and ask you wich OS to load at start-up.
IMOP stay away from ME. I did not have good luck with it.
Just an option for you.

 

[Joyride]

So 98 SE is alot more stable then ME I take it and therefore better for games?

 

[Igore]

win 2k pro

ig

 

[CQuinn]

It is a true multitasking environment, it may not be a good multitasking
enviroment but it still is one. There is no such thing as a false multitasking
environment.

The whole idea of &quot;true&quot; multitasking was a marketing lie thought up by early
OS/2 proponents to try to set thier task management model apart from that
of Windows95.

 

[LordUnum]

Windows 2000 Pro in a heartbeat. Rock solid as the exclusive OS on:

O/C'ed Celeron 466, 128MB SDRAM
O/C'ed P2-300, 128MB SDRAM
(both systems will be upgraded to 256MB RAM in a little bit)

...and yes, not only do I run standard productivity apps such as Word, Excel, and Photoshop, but I also do plenty of gaming. Contrary to what others have said about it's support of &quot;older&quot; Win95, and DOS games, I have found it will run a lot of them---just with no sound in most cases. If a game fails to run, you can select a different level of compatability (Win95, Win98, and NT4.0), and failing that, there is a utility called VDMSound that will try to emulate your sound hardware in a way DOS would normally recognize. My newer games run about as fast as they did under Win98SE. As of yet (2 months of use), I truly have no complaints about this OS.

I guess &quot;MS Works&quot; = MS Windows 2000 Pro LOL!